Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.9.1

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:41:24 -0700

Johannes Schindelin <[email-masked]> writes:

>> I was hoping to hear from you sooner and do v2.9.2 with your t0006
>> workaround with lazy-prereq changes from Peff (i.e. "Makes sense!"
>> above), so that you do not have to do two releases in a row
>> (i.e. skipping v2.9.1 saying "Git for Windows skipped that one
>> because it was not quite right; this release fixes the issue" in
>> your v2.9.2 announcement).
>
> I am sorry that you expected me to be more available. It is a pretty crazy
> week already (and trying to get a Git for Windows v2.9.1 out of the door
> after dropping everything else on Tuesday morning added quite a bit to the
> load), so I am at times unable to even read the Git mailing list.

Actually these back-and-forth was an attempt to help you reduce the
load by not having to worry about the t0006 workaround.  Checking
your inbox would have been quicker than writing another of your own
version.

> As I am more concerned with Jeff Hostetler's patch now (the "very verbose
> porcelain status"; I merged the Pull Request after seeing no comments on
> his mail, but then Peff provided some good feedback, so now I am not quite
> certain how to go about it: revert, or wait if the 2nd iteration is
> acceptable and take that), so I am not immediately releasing any version,
> anyway.

As I said, I'd be waiting for a reroll of that to queue on 'pu', but
as a new feature, it won't appear in any of the v2.9.x releases.